ArticlePloS one2022
Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient barriers and facilitators to lung cancer screening uptake and intention to screen: a systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Pooled it
- Participant factors associated with psychosocial impacts of lung cancer screening: A systematic review.Cancer medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring Whether and How People Experiencing High Deprivation Access Diagnostic Services: A Qualitative Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Facilitators and Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening during Long COVID: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-Study Synthesis of Qualitative Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Can general practitioners use smoking status data in electronic health records to recruit patients for lung cancer screening? A descriptive study using the MedicineInsight database.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Maximising Participation in the Australian National Lung Cancer Screening Program: A Discrete Choice Experiment of Eligible, High-Risk Individuals.Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) · 2026Article
- Exploring Attitudes to Lung Cancer Screening in England: An Inductive Content Analysis of Online Commentary Following Media Announcement of a National Lung Cancer Screening Programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Ready to screen implementation trial protocol: a cluster randomized implementation trial comparing a bundled implementation strategy versus a simple implementation strategy to improve intention to screen in the Australian National Lung Cancer Screening Program.Implementation science : IS · 2026Article
- Engaging Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Communities to Prepare for Lung Cancer Screening Implementation in Australia: A Qualitative Focus Group Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Influencing factors of low-dose computed tomography screening behavior among first-degree relatives of lung cancer patients based on the theory of planned behavior: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- 'Every Touch Point Is an Opportunity': Tobacco Control Experts' Views on How to Implement Smoking Cessation Interventions Within an Australian Lung Cancer Screening Program.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- "We need to work towards it, whatever it takes."-participation factors in the acceptability and feasibility of lung cancer screening in Australia: the perspectives of key stakeholders.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionParticipation in lung cancer screening (LCS) trials and real-world programs is low, with many people at high-risk for lung cancer opting out of baseline screening after registering interest. We aimed to identify the potential drivers of participation in LCS in the Australian setting, to inform future implementation.
methodsSemi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with individuals at high-risk of lung cancer who were eligible for screening and who had either participated ('screeners') or declined to participate ('decliners') in the International Lung Screening Trial from two Australian sites. Interview guide development was informed by the Precaution Adoption Process Model. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the COM-B model of behaviour to explore capability, opportunity and motivation related to screening behaviour.
resultsThirty-nine participants were interviewed (25 screeners; 14 decliners). Motivation to participate in screening was high in both groups driven by the lived experience of lung cancer and a belief that screening is valuable, however decliners unlike their screening counterparts reported low self-efficacy. Decliners in our study reported challenges in capability including ability to attend and in knowledge and understanding. Decliners also reported challenges related to physical and social opportunity, in particular location as a barrier and lack of family support to attend screening.
conclusionOur findings suggest that motivation alone may not be sufficient to change behaviour related to screening participation, unless capability and opportunity are also considered. Focusing strategies on barriers related to capability and opportunity such as online/telephone support, mobile screening programs and financial assistance for screeners may better enhance screening participation. Providing funding for clinicians to support individuals in decision-making and belief in self-efficacy may foster motivation. Targeting interventions that connect eligible individuals with the LCS program will be crucial for successful implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.